RESUMO
Applications of biometrics in various societal contexts have been increasing in the United States, and policy debates about potential restrictions and expansions for specific biometrics (such as facial recognition and DNA identification) have been intensifying. Empirical data about public perspectives on different types of biometrics can inform these debates. We surveyed 4048 adults to explore perspectives regarding experience and comfort with six types of biometrics; comfort providing biometrics in distinct scenarios; trust in social actors to use two types of biometrics (facial images and DNA) responsibly; acceptability of facial images in eight scenarios; and perceived effectiveness of facial images for five tasks. Respondents were generally comfortable with biometrics. Trust in social actors to use biometrics responsibly appeared to be context specific rather than dependent on biometric type. Contrary to expectations given mounting attention to dataveillance concerns, we did not find sociodemographic factors to influence perspectives on biometrics in obvious ways. These findings underscore a need for qualitative approaches to understand the contextual factors that trigger strong opinions of comfort with and acceptability of biometrics in different settings, by different actors, and for different purposes and to identify the informational needs relevant to the development of appropriate policies and oversight.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Healthcare providers have key roles in the prevention of, detection of, and interventions for human trafficking. Yet caring for trafficked persons is particularly challenging: patients whose identities are unknown, unreliable, or false could receive subpar care from providers delivering care in a vacuum of relevant information. The application of precision medicine principles and integration of biometric data (including genetic information) could facilitate patient identification, enable longitudinal medical records, and improve continuity and quality of care for this vulnerable patient population. Scant empirical data exist regarding healthcare system preparedness and care for the needs of this vulnerable population nor data on perspectives on the use and risks of biometrics or genetic information for trafficked patients. METHODS: To address this gap, we conducted mixed-methods research involving semi-structured interviews with key informants, which informed a subsequent broad survey of physicians and registered nurses. RESULTS: Our findings support the perception that trafficked persons obtain care yet remain unnoticed or undocumented in the electronic health record. Our survey findings further reveal that healthcare providers remain largely unaware of human trafficking issues and are inadequately prepared to provide patient-centered care for trafficked and unidentified patients. CONCLUSION: Meaningful efforts to design and implement precision medicine initiatives in an inclusive way that optimizes impacts are unlikely to succeed without concurrent efforts to increase general awareness of and preparedness to care for trafficked persons. Additional research is needed to examine properly the potential utility for biometrics to improve the delivery of care for trafficked patients.
Assuntos
Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente/organização & administração , Atenção à Saúde/organização & administração , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Empatia/ética , Pessoal de Saúde/normas , Tráfico de Pessoas/psicologia , Assistência Centrada no Paciente/normas , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Atenção à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Pessoal de Saúde/psicologia , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde , Tráfico de Pessoas/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto JovemAssuntos
Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto , Genômica/ética , Achados Incidentais , Justiça Social , HumanosRESUMO
Genomic technologies are reaching the point of being able to detect genetic variation in patients at high accuracy and reduced cost, offering the promise of fundamentally altering medicine. Still, although scientists and policy advisers grapple with how to interpret and how to handle the onslaught and ambiguity of genome-wide data, established and well-validated molecular technologies continue to have an important role, especially in regions of the world that have more limited access to next-generation sequencing capabilities. Here we review the range of methods currently available in a clinical setting as well as emerging approaches in clinical molecular diagnostics. In parallel, we outline implementation challenges that will be necessary to address to ensure the future of genetic medicine.